STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NY 11433
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: DJ210131RO
(Refile of DG210243RO)
M. Asch and H. Mednick,
DOCKET NO.: CE210146S
2402 65th Street
ORDER AND OPINION DENYING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
The above-named owner refiled and perfected a timely petition for
administrative review of an order issued on July 17, 1989
concerning the housing accommodations relating to the above-
described docket number.
The Commissioner has reviewed all the evidence in the record and
has carefully considered that portion of the record relevant to the
issues raised by the petition.
The tenant commenced this proceeding on May 4, 1988 by filing a
complaint asserting that the owner had failed to maintain certain
services in the subject apartment.
In answer, the owner asserted in substance that repairs were done.
On May 22, 1989, an inspection of the subject apartment was
conducted by a DHCR staff member who confirmed the existence of
By an order dated July 17, 1989, the Administrator directed the
restoration of services and ordered a rent reduction.
In this petition, the owner contends in substance that repairs were
made and further contends without any substantiation that the
tenant refused access.
In answer, the tenant stated that the complained of conditions have
not been corrected, and denied in substance refusing access.
After careful consideration, the Commissioner is of the opinion
that the petition should be denied.
Pursuant to Section 2523.4 of the Rent Stabilization Code, DHCR is
authorized to order a rent reduction, upon application by a tenant,
where it is found that an owner has failed to maintain required
services. The owner's petition does not establish any basis to
modify or revoke the Administrator's determination based on the
physical inspection which confirmed the existence of defective
conditions, warranting a rent reduction.
Furthermore, the owner's allegation concerning access was not
raised in the proceeding below before the Administrator prior to
the issuance of the Administrator's order and is now raised for the
first time on appeal. The Commissioner also notes that a copy of
a May 20, 1988 work order was submitted for the first time with
this appeal and was therefore not before the Administrator.
Accordingly, both of these defenses are beyond the scope of review
which is limited to the issues and evidence that had been before
The rent will be restored only when an owner's application to
restore the rent is filed and granted. The owner is advised to
file such an application if the facts so warrant.
The automatic stay of the retroactive rent abatement that resulted
from the filing of this petition is vacated upon issuance of this
Order and Opinion.
THEREFORE, in accordance with the Rent Stabilization Law and Code
and Operational Bulletin 84-1, it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is, denied, and
that the Administrator's order be, and the same hereby is,
LULA M. ANDERSON